Share This Article:

Response Distortion on the NEO PI-R among Candidates Taking the Entrance Examination to the National School of Civil Aviation (ENAC-France)

Abstract Full-Text HTML Download Download as PDF (Size:271KB) PP. 393-398
DOI: 10.4236/psych.2012.35055    5,011 Downloads   8,008 Views   Citations

ABSTRACT

This study examined the effect of a selection context on the responses to a five factor personality questionnaire (Revised NEO Personality Inventory) of 974 candidates taking the entrance examination to the ENAC (National School of Civil Aviation, France). A response distortion index was calculated using Schinka, Kinder and Kremer (1997)’s method. The results indicate: 1) lower neuroticism scores but higher conscientiousness, agreeableness and extraversion scores compared to standard conditions; 2) a high estimated effect of the response distortion index on all dimensions of the NEO PI-R except for Openness to experience; 3) substantial stability of scores at a one-year interval (N = 117). The paper discusses the conceptual and practical value of this response distortion index for measuring the dimensions of the NEO PI-R in candidates taking the entrance examination to the ENAC.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

Juhel, J. , Brunot, S. & Zapata, G. (2012). Response Distortion on the NEO PI-R among Candidates Taking the Entrance Examination to the National School of Civil Aviation (ENAC-France). Psychology, 3, 393-398. doi: 10.4236/psych.2012.35055.

References

[1] Bagby, R. M., & Marshall, M. B. (2003). Positive Impression Management and its influence on the NEO PI-R: A comparison of analog and differential prevalence group designs. Psychological Assessment, 15, 333-339. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.15.3.333
[2] Ballenger, J. F., Caldwell-Andrews, A., & Baer, R. A. (2001). Effects of positive impression management on the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised in a clinical population. Psychological Assessment, 13, 254-260. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.13.2.254
[3] Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x
[4] Bernard, L. C., & Walsh, R. P. (2004). Socially desirable and non- purposeful responding on the NEO PI-R. Counseling and Clinical Psychology Journal, 1, 4-16.
[5] Berry, D. T. R., Bagby, R. M., Smerz, J., Rinaldo, J. C., Caldwell-Andrews, A., & Baer, R. A. (2001). Effectiveness of NEO PI-R research validity scales for discriminating analog malingering and genuine psychopathology. Journal of Personality Assessment, 76, 496-516. doi:10.1207/S15327752JPA7603_10
[6] Caldwell-Andrews, A., Baer, R. A., & Berry, D. T. R. (2000). Effects of response sets on NEO-PI R scores and their relation to external criteria. Journal of Personality Assessment, 74, 472-488. doi:10.1207/S15327752JPA7403_10
[7] Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO PI-R professional manual. Florida: Psychological Assessment Resources Inc. (version francaise, ECPA, 1998, 2003).
[8] Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1997). Stability and change in personality assessment: The NEO personality inventory in the year 2000. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 86-94. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6801_7
[9] Costa, P. T., McCrae, R. R., & Rolland, J. P. (1998-2004). Manuel de l'inventaire de personnalité NEO PI-R. Paris: ECPA.
[10] Ellingson, J. E., Smith, D. B., & Sackett, P. R. (2001). Investigating the influence of social desirability on personality factor structure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 122-133. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.122
[11] Griffin, B., Hesketh, B., & Grayson, D. (2004). Applicants faking good: evidence of item bias in the NEO PI-R. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1545-1558. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.06.004
[12] Hogan, R. (1991). Personality and personality measurement. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 873-919). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
[13] Hogan, R. (2005). In defense of personality measurement: New wine for old whiners. Human Performance, 18, 331-341. doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1804_1
[14] Hogan, J., Barrett, P., & Hogan, R. (2007). Personality measurement, faking, and employment selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1270-1285. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1270
[15] Hogan, R., Hogan, J., & Robert, B. W. (1996). Personality measurement and employment decisions: Questions and answers. American Psychologist, 51, 469-477. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.51.5.469
[16] Hogan, R., De Fruyt, F., & Rolland, J.-P. (2006). Validité et intérêt des méthodes d’évaluation de la personnalité à des fins de sélection: une perspective de psychologie appliquée aux problématiques des entreprises. Psychologie Fran?aise, 51, 245-264. doi:10.1016/j.psfr.2005.12.007
[17] Judge, T. J., Higgins, C. A., Thoresen, C. J., & Barrick, M. R. (1999). The big five personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span. Personnel Psychology, 52, 621-652. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00174.x
[18] Maassen, G. H. (2004). The standard error in the Jacobson and truax reliable change index: The classical approach to the assessment of reliable change. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 10, 888-893. doi:10.1017/S1355617704106097
[19] Marshall, M. B., De Fruyt, F., Rolland, J.-P., & Bagby, R. M. (2005). Socially desirable responding and the factorial stability of the NEO PI-R. Psychological Assessment, 17, 379-384. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.17.3.379
[20] McFarland, L. A. (2003). Warning against faking on a personality test: Effects on applicant reactions and personality test scores. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 265-276. doi:10.1111/j.0965-075X.2003.00250.x
[21] McFarland, L. A., & Ryan, A. M. (2000). Variance in faking across non-cognitive measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 812-821. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.85.5.812
[22] McFarland, L. A., Wiechmann, D. & Chandler, C. W. (2001). Using appropriateness fit to identify faking on a personality test. Paper presented at the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology conference, April 2001, San Diego, CA.
[23] Morey, L. C., Quigley, B. D., Sanislow, C. A., Skodol, A. E., McGlashan, T. H., Shea, M. T., Stout, R. L., Zanarini, M. C., & Gunderson, J. G. (2002). Substance or style? An investigation of the NEO-PI-R validity scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 79, 583-599. doi:10.1207/S15327752JPA7903_11
[24] Mount, M. K., & Barrick, M. R. (1998). Five reasons why the “big five” article has been frequently cited. Personnel Psychology, 51, 849-858. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1998.tb00743.x
[25] Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., & Stewart, G. L. (1998). Personality predictors of performance in jobs involving interaction with others. Human Performance, 11, 145-166. doi:10.1080/08959285.1998.9668029
[26] Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1987, 2012). Mplus: Statistical analysis with latent variables (Version 6.12) [Computer software]. Los Angeles: Author.
[27] Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Reiss, A. D. (1996). Role of social desirability in personality testing for personnel selection: The red herring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 660-679. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.6.660
[28] Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., Dilchert, C., & Deller, J. (2006) (Eds.). Special issue: Considering response distortion in personality measurement for industrial, work and organizational psychology research and practice. Psychology Science, 48, 207-297.
[29] Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598- 609. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.3.598
[30] Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, J. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measure of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17-59). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
[31] Paulhus, D. L., & Reid, D. B. (1991). Enhancement and denial in socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 307-317. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.307
[32] Paulhus, D. L., Bruce, M. N., & Trapnell, P. D. (1995). Effects of self-presentation strategies on personality profiles and their structure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 100-108. doi:10.1177/0146167295212001
[33] Piedmont, R. L., McCrae, R. R., Riemann, R., & Angleitner, A. (2000). On the invalidity of validity scales: Evidence from self-reports and observer ratings in volunteer samples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 582-593. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.3.582
[34] Reid-Seiser, H. L., & Fritzsche, B. A. (2001). The usefulness of the NEO PI-R positive presentation management scale for detecting response distortion in employment contexts. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 639-650. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00168-9
[35] Rolland, J.-P., Parker, W. D., & Stumpf, H. (1998). A psychometric examination of the French translations of the NEO-PI-R and NEO-FFI. Journal of Personality Assessment, 7, 269-291. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa7102_13
[36] Rosse, J. G., Stecher, M. D., Levin, R. A., & Miller, J. L. (1998). The impact of response distortion on preemployment personality testing and hiring decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 634-644. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.83.4.634
[37] Salgado, J. F. (1997). The five factor model of personality and job performance in the European Community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 30-43. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.82.1.30
[38] Sandal, G. M., Musson, D., Helmreich, R. L., & Gravdal, L. (2005). Social desirability bias in personality testing: Implications for astronaut selection. Acta Astronautica, 57, 634-641.
[39] doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2005.03.011
[40] Schinka, J. A., Kinder, B. N., & Kremer, T. (1997). Research validity scales for the NEO PI-R: Development and initial validation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 127-138. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6801_10
[41] Schmit, M. J., & Ryan, A. M. (1993). The Big Five in personnel selection: Factor structure in applicant and non applicant populations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 966-974. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.6.966
[42] Topping, G. D., & O’Gorman, J. G. (1997). Effects of faking set on validity of the NEO-FFI. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 117-124. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00006-8
[43] Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (1999). Meta-analyses of fakability estimates: Implications for personality measurement. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 197-210. doi:10.1177/00131649921969802
[44] Wiggens, J. S. (1964). Convergences among stylistic response measures from objective personality tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 24, 551-562. doi:10.1177/001316446402400310
[45] Young, M. S., & Schinka, J. A. (2001). Research validity scales for the NEO-PI-R: Additional evidence for reliability and validity. Journal of Personality Assessment, 76, 412-420. doi:10.1207/S15327752JPA7603_04

  
comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2019 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.